Advertisement

Something To Chew On: What it means to be green

I've recently come across information about sustainability that makes me question which efforts and practices are worth it. What is truly sustainable?

Do we know what is and isn't sustainable development? - Debbie Phillips-Donaldson

I spent the US July 4th holiday weekend with relatives who
are doing their best to "go green." To them, this means things
like recycling trash; using recycled, washable plastic plates
for the picnic rather than paper plates (though they
acknowledged that washing the plastic ones consumes water and
energy); and serving a variety of foods and beverages labeled
organic - from bread to blueberries to red wine made from
organic grapes. (But, interestingly, no organic cat food for
the furry family member.)

Though I left their home feeling a little guilty that I'm
not moving quite as quickly toward a greener lifestyle, I've
recently come across information about sustainability that
makes me question which efforts and practices are worth it.
What is truly sustainable?

Consumer power

US pet owners seeking natural, organic or eco-friendly
products tend to be women who are home owners living in larger
metropolitan areas, with graduate degrees or higher and
household incomes of $150,000 or more. (This comes from the
Simmons Market Research Bureau and is cited in Packaged Facts'
September 2007 report,
Natural, Organic and Eco-Friendly Pet Products in the
US
.)

My above-mentioned relatives happen to buck several of those
trendsbut like other US consumers who buy organic products and
make other lifestyle choices generally considered healthier and
more sustainable, they do so voluntarily because these issues
are important to them.

In Western Europe and other developed regions, the
"greening" of food and other product chains is heavily
legislated. European Union regulations have banned substances
like genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and antibiotic
growth promoters in feed and mandated farmers to reduce
emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG) like methane, ammonia and
nitrous oxide. This legislation, however, has been driven by
consumer demand; regulatory experts in Europe often say
consumer preferences = political power.

The hidden load

But are consumers - or even manufacturers and producers -
well informed about what is and isn't safe and sustainable
development? For example, according to a new report from the
Hudson Institute's Center for Global Food Issues, grain-fed
beef may produce 40% less GHG than pasture-fed beef and be the
more sustainable practice. (See
http://www.cgfi.org/pdfs/nofollow/beef-eco-benefits-paper.pdf
.)

At the Petfood and Nutrition Update Symposium in Solingen,
Germany, in June, Holger Rohn of Trifolium (a sustainability
consultancy in Friedberg, Germany,
www.trifolium.org
) presented examples of the level of resources different types
of food production require. Making 1 kg of regular
(non-organic) bread takes 42 kg of water, 605 kg of soil and
leads to 1 kg of erosion - while producing 1 kg of organic
bread uses 40 kg of water, 1,097 kg of soil and 2 kg of
erosion, according to Trifolium.

Rohn also provided data on the "hidden material load" of
various human activities in Germany - effects such as erosion,
earth displacement and unconverted materials that are not
readily apparent in food production, the making of clothing,
education or housing. In some sectors, especially food and
housing, the hidden effects are greater than the known ones:
the visible material load of minerals, raw fossil fuels and
biological raw materials. Rohn said Germany's hidden material
load is higher than Japan's but much smaller than the US's.

Not easy being green

Like Kermit the Frog on the popular children's TV show
Sesame Street
, consumers and manufacturers alike are finding that it's not
easy being green. But given our many finite natural resources
and the very real economic, technological and ecological limits
to what we can develop, we have to start somewhere. As Rohn
commented, to date many organizations, governments and
individuals have been acting as if we had four planets - and we
know for certain that is not sustainable.

Debbie Phillips-Donaldson is editor-in-chief of Petfood Industry. Email her at dphillips@wattglobal.com.